That doesn't fit with the realities of both the business and tech worlds, where philosophy has proved itself to be not only relevant but often the cornerstone of great innovation. Philosophy and entrepreneurship are a surprisingly good fit. Some of the most successful tech entrepreneurs and innovators come from a philosophy background and put the critical thinking skills they developed to good use launching new digital services to fill needs in various domains of society. Atlantic contributor Edward Tenner even went so far as to call philosophy the "most practical major." ...

... Here are a few reasons that philosophy majors will become the entrepreneurs who are shaping the business world. ...

Richard Lyons, the dean of University of California, Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, has a dire forecast for business education: “Half of the business schools in this country could be out of business in 10 years—or five,” he says.

The threat, says Lyons, is that more top MBA programs will start to offer degrees online. That will imperil the industry’s business model. For most business schools, students pursuing part-time and executive MBAs generate crucial revenue. Those programs, geared toward working professionals, will soon have to compete with elite online alternatives for the same population.

Lower-ranked business schools, rather than recognized names such as Harvard Business School and Wharton, are most vulnerable to this phenomenon. When the big players start offering online degrees, they’ll draw far-flung students who might otherwise have opted for the convenience of a part-time program close to home. ...

Don't look now, but it seems that some MBA students are increasingly interested in doing good as well as making money, and more business schools are happy to accommodate them. This is all to the, ahem, good, because we need all the smart, talented MBAs we can get to attack our biggest social, ethical and environmental problems.

While the vast majority of jobs for MBAs are still the traditional ones, I'm seeing evidence of a nascent shift. Indeed, no less a prophet than Michael Porter sees the same thing, and believes that there are opportunities a-plenty for companies that focus on solving there world's most urgent social environmental problems. "If we can get business seeing itself differently and others to see businesses differently," Porter said in a recent TED talk, "we can change the world. My students are getting [the fact that [sic] we can break down this divide, this tension and finally have solutions." As Porter (and C.K. Prahalad before him) suggest, there is plenty of money to be made in doing so. ...

...While there's no doubt that a college degree increases earning power and broadens opportunities, today's high cost of education means it makes sense to more carefully consider which degree you earn. When it comes to return on investment (ROI), not all degrees are considered equal. This article exposes eight college degrees with poor ROI....

... Improving your capability for both giving and receiving feedback is a key factor for every leader. This assessment can help you to understand what you currently prefer and avoid. Living in extremes generally doesn’t lead to lasting success. Positive feedback helps you to know what went well and encourages you to move forward, while corrective feedback opens different options to explore. Whether you prefer one or avoid the other, next time you are faced with a feedback challenge, take the opportunity to be fully aware of the value of what you give and receive.

... Pushing back on a request from your boss can be intimidating (especially if you work for someone who’s, let’s say, not the most receptive to answers outside the realm of “Of course! When would you like it completed?”), but the truth is, it’s significantly better than setting yourself up to fail.

The trick is to push back more diplomatically—getting your point across without actually using the word “no.” Read on for how to approach some common situations, as well as one time you should probably just say “yes.” ...

... Men have the luxury of not having to worry about such details. Instead, they can devote their brains to developing cunning strategies to advance their own interests and careers. Men often see meetings as a chance to profile themselves, particularly if the boss or an important customer is in attendance. They will speak up, even if they have little of value to offer -- the main point is that everybody sees them talking. Women will often not speak up unless they have something important to say. Who's going to win the deal?

In addition to the tedium and insipidity of the typical meeting -- dreaded by male and female alike -- women have to think about their voices, their gestures, their eye contact, their style and their very woman-ness. Men simply don't have to worry about these things. This is utterly unfair, but until women occupy more executive positions, these unspoken rules of meetings will remain a challenge for them. ...

... In his TEDTalk, Rowe explains that the tradespeople he profiled on his show, Dirty Jobs, are surprisingly happy. "Roadkill picker-uppers whistle while they work," he said. "I swear to God -- I did it with them." To Rowe, these experiences began to challenge many of the "sacred cows" he had been taught to believe about work satisfaction. Perhaps foremost of these sanctified ideas he began to doubt was the importance of pre-existing passion.

"Follow your passion... what could possibly be wrong with that?" Rowe joked in his talk. "Probably the worst advice I ever got." ...

... In his talk, Rowe points out that many of the happiest people in the country have jobs that no one would ever identify as a pre-existing passion. He cited a sheep herder, a pig farmer ("smells like hell, but God bless him, he's making a great living"), and a guy who makes flower pots out of cow dung, as examples of unexpected professional contentment. These observations are powerful for a simple reason: They separate career satisfaction from the specifics of the work.

The pig farmer is not happy because he was born with a pig farmer gene, or because he grew up feeling a deep pre-existing passion for pork. He's instead happy because he's making a great living, has tons of autonomy, and does work that's useful to the world (he raises his pigs on food scraps from nearby casinos that would otherwise go to waste). You could replace pig farming with any number of pursuits, but so long as they yielded these same traits, he'd love his work. ...

... The physicists are far from the only people moving away from PowerPoint-style presentations: The CEOs of and have eliminated the presentations from meetings. In his recently published memoir, former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates Gates writes that as CIA director, he banned slides except for maps and charts, but he could not do so as Secretary of Defense. Gen. James Mattis, former commander of U.S. Central Command, Maj. Gen. H.R. McMaster banned the presentations when he led a successful mission in Iraq, and he compared PowerPoint to an internal threat.

The main advantage of forgoing PowerPoint is that it forces both the speaker and the listener to pay attention, says John Paul Chou, an assistant professor of physics at Rutgers University who recently presented at one of the Fermilab forums.

With PowerPoint, he says, it's "easier to let your mind go on autopilot, and you start to lose focus more easily." ...

Giving to charity may actually hurt a company’s reputation, a new study from the Yale School of Management has suggested.

Interested in how people view donors who make a profit while doing good, Yale professors George Newman and Daylian Cain presented a number of charitable scenarios to their research participants. Their findings, which have been published in Psychological Science, suggest that people are quick to dismiss those who benefit in any way while engaging in philanthropy.

... But new research shows there's clearly more to the story than just individual skill, pluck, and ambition. The study, by Temple University’s Seok-Woo Kwon, the University of Missouri’s Colleen Heflin, and Duke University’s Martin Ruef, examines the relationship between self-employment levels and community support structures across America’s metro areas. Published in the December issue of the American Sociological Review, the authors argue that the strength of local social networks and trust — using the term “social capital,” popularized by Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam — plays a major role in whether a city is able to foster a culture of self-employment and entrepreneurship.

The study measures entrepreneurship using data on self-employment from the Census, and compares that to data from Putnam’s own Social Capital Benchmark Survey and the General Social Survey. The results get at how key aspects of social capital, such as membership in voluntary organizations or variation in trust across communities, affect rates of self-employment and entrepreneurial activity. ...

... Kimberly Palmer, author of “The Economy of You: Discover Your Inner Entrepreneur and Recession-Proof Your Life,” said she had noticed that the most eager audience for the book was often people approaching retirement, or already in it. “They want to leverage their skills and experience into something entrepreneurial,” she said.

According to a recent study published by the Kauffman Foundation and Legal Zoom, in 2013, about 20 percent of all new businesses were started by entrepreneurs aged 50 to 59 years, and 15 percent were 60 and over.

And, in fact, over the last decade, the highest rate of entrepreneurial activity belongs to those in the 55-to-64 age group, according to the Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity.

A desire to work for oneself and create a business that is meaningful and has social impact at this stage of life, combined with a job market that makes it tough for workers over 50 to get hired, has clearly pushed more people to pursue the entrepreneurial path. ...

... A new data release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals which industries are going to grow the fastest between 2012 and 2022. Health care and technology, already giants today, are expected to keep up their rapid growth over the next decade. At the same time, manufacturing is expected to continue its rapid decline.

So if you're looking ahead to the future, here are the industries that are going to boom. ...

FORTUNE -- It all seems so simple: Hit the "place order" button online and get a head of lettuce, a dozen eggs, or a gallon of milk delivered to your doorstep within 24 hours. But behind the scenes, the burgeoning market of online grocery delivery involves a surprisingly delicate dance to ensure that perishable food gets from producer to consumer in just enough time to avoid (quite literally) a spoiled delivery.

With demand on the rise, giants such as Wal-Mart (WMT) and Amazon (AMZN) are jumping into the fray as investors bet millions on a crop of startups with names like Good Eggs, Relay Foods, and Farmigo. Yet actually turning a profit and managing the logistics of food delivery is tricky, says Leslie Hand, a director at IDC Retail Insights, a market research firm. Unlike shipping books or durable products via UPS, fresh food delivery requires specific short routing, planning, technology, and a race against the clock. ...

Low pay in the restaurant industry has spurred a series of one-day walkouts this year by fast-food employees demanding more, yet a trio of chains found their way onto a new list of the 50 best places to work. Starbucks (SBUX) (No. 39), Chick-fil-A (No. 43), and Texas Roadhouse (TXRH) (No. 47) made it onto the annual ranking by jobs website Glassdoor.com, derived from reviews submitted by U.S.-based employees. ...

Embedded in a new research paper (PDF) by Harvard economist Claudia Goldin is a valuable piece of news for anyone who is frustrated by the stubborn persistence of the gap in earnings between women and men. It has long been held that women earn only $0.77 for ever dollar that men do, in large part because of discrimination. But, Goldin argues, most of the difference comes down to factors that have nothing to do with sexism: The number of hours a person works and the degree of job flexibility.

This means that companies offering true, stigma-free flexibility and linear compensation—meaning the same pay per hour worked, regardless of when it is worked—have the lowest gaps in pay between men and women—and, in many cases, more women employees overall.

All that’s left is for corporate America to do something about it. ...

... So yes, under any of the preceding conditions, a profit-is-all-that-matters approach will work.

But, under circumstance other than those above – it probably won’t work.If a leader needs to build a sustainably growing and profitable enterprise in an industry that requires a high degree of innovation or creativity and/or must provide excellent customer service – then the money-only approach will not work. I’ve seen profit-only leaders fail time and time again under such circumstances.

And the core reason – from my observation – is that delivering innovation, creativity or extraordinary customer service demands talented, hardworking employees who are loyal and motivated, and who are supported to do their best. And in this day and age, such employees are in high demand. As soon as they realize that a leader, or a company, cares about them only as a means to the end of raking in the dough – and will therefore consistently look for ways to give them as little of that dough as possible – their resumes will be on the street.

If you, as a leader, need to build a sustainably profitable business that relies upon innovation and/or great customer service to succeed, then I’d suggest the following approach: hire the best people you can find, support their development and their creativity, and establish an environment that both demands and rewards great results. I predict you’ll make lots of money – all without having to avoid telling your mom how you run your business.

Nov 25, 2013

"... Heifetz trained as a psychiatrist, and he describes his view of effective leadership with an analogy from medicine. "When a patient comes to a surgeon, the surgeon's default setting is to say, 'You've got a problem? I'll take the problem off your shoulders and I'll deliver back to you a solution.' In psychiatry, when a person comes to you with a problem, it's not your job actually to solve their problem. It's your job to develop their capacity to solve their own problem."..."

"Being a kind leader does not mean that you don’t fire people. It doesn’t mean that you don’t make tough decisions that will impact the bottom line. And it doesn’t mean that you won’t work harder than those who are unkind. It simply means that you are focused as much on the delivery of your message as you are on the message itself. ... "

... The self-made super-rich (net worth = US$500 million or more) are hardly immune from the personal complications of these stresses. They may very well fear a crashing economy or a stroke as much as anyone else. However, in ethnological investigations of the self-made super-rich, there’s often a somewhat different underlying psychology in action. To understand this core motivation, let’s take a step back and consider a couple of the often more pronounced major concerns of the self-made super-rich.

Fear of losing their wealth. Their fortunes are very much a factor of their efforts. The self-made super-rich are well aware of what they sacrificed and what they did (some of which is likely disconcerting) to become so affluent. Coupled with the wealth creation high, there are times when the thought of losing their vast wealth is actually quite terrifying especially since it’s usually fairly difficult to reconstitute such personal fortunes.

Fear of losing power and influence. In the process of creating a momentous personal fortune, many of the self-made super-rich have created a network of successful and powerful individuals. Consequently, either directly or through these individuals, they’re able to exert substantial power and influence in the world. As with losing their wealth, when they lose this capability it is usually impossible to get it back. ...

... By becoming insignificant, the self-made super-rich are losing their self-identity that is often a product as well as function of their vast wealth. It’s that they are no longer important to the world at large, but they’re no longer important in their own heads.

For a long time, having the best supply chain was enough. This is how Walmart became the powerhouse retailer it is: by building the largest, broadest, most efficient system for moving products across the United States. Then along came advanced analytics, which allowed companies to determine what products to suggest next to the product you were already buying, or to provide add-ons that any specific buyer might want, such as free shipping or free bonus products. Amazon mastered this strategy.

Now those techniques have timed out, too. We already know that 3D printing and robotic manufacturing technology can overtake centralized production. But the difference here is that a single company might not emerge to capitalize on these technologies the way singular brands like Walmart and Amazon have in the past. Instead, we are now entering the primacy of design.

From a consumer perspective, this means more products to choose from at better prices, faster delivery, and with greater personalization. But from a retail perspective this is nothing short of revolutionary: the bottom is dropping out of the middle of retailers’ entire business—the part where they produce and provide customers with products. ...

... Retail consultancy WD Partners has published a report showing how traditional stores can still appeal to modern shoppers by updating their brick and mortar models rather than trying to chase Amazon online.

No American politician can go wrong singing the virtues of small businesses. But the much-revered cornerstone of economic growth is a broad category, encompassing everyone from the independent consultant to the coffee-shop owner to the start-up founder on the verge of explosive growth. And while our rhetoric may not distinguish between them, policymakers must in order to understand how to best support the needs of different kinds of small businesses. ...

I was one of the founders of our modern methods of both socially responsible and impact investing. In 1982, the Calvert Socially Responsible Mutual Funds, of which I was one of the founders, was the first family of such funds and today the Calvert Group has over $12 billion under management and is the largest family of such funds. In 1975, I was also one of the founders of the Institute for Community Economics, one of the first designers of impact investment funds (in those days we called it "community investment").

What distinguishes the three kinds of investments in the title of this paper from each other is the priority of each. Our priority each moment determines everything else we do. All secondary priorities honor and yield to the leadership of our highest priority. ...

Some investors are finding meaning by putting their money where their faith is.

Faith-based mutual funds typically screen out stocks of companies that violate the tenets of a given religion or religious denomination. A Muslim fund is likely to screen out companies related to pork production, for example, while a Catholic fund can avoid a maker of contraceptives.

"In almost every regular mutual fund, a [religious] client is going to get a share of companies that are involved in activities in which they'd rather not be involved," says Dan Hardt, a certified financial planner in Louisville, Ky., who specializes in Christian faith-based planning. Mr. Hardt says among his client base, abortion is "easily the No. 1 'egregious' activity in which they would like to avoid investing." ...

Denonminations also do screening with investment of their coporate funds. Here is a link the the Mission Responsibility Through Investment of the Presbyterian Mission Agency of the Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., the denomination to which I belong. This committee implements denominational policy on socially responsbile investing of the denominations's funds and works to persuade corporations to change practices. Some denonminations have similar approaches.

... In most cases workers equity stakes are fairly small. But the authors argue that this widespread, if shallow, citizen capitalism is the basis from which something much bolder can be built. They urge a 21st century version of George Washington's logic: government incentives designed to encourage firms to expand employee share ownership. Their proposals range from the small-bore (use the federal government to spread the word on employee share ownership) to a more ambitious restructuring of tax incentives (for instance, making all existing corporate tax breaks contingent on a firm having a profit-sharing or employee ownership scheme).

Are these proposals a good idea? Certaintly the logic that broadening capital participation is part of the answer to countering the squeeze on workers is an appealing one. But does it make sense for workers to build up capital stakes in the firms they work for? One worry has to be the concentration of risk. ...

... Rather than dole out new special incentives to promote a particular, and perhaps risky, route to broader share ownership, why not eliminate existing incentives that serve to encourage the concentration of capital? The carried-interest loophole, which allows private-equity partners to pay (lower) capital-gains tax rates on their income, would be an obvious place to start.

... The argument for the open-plan office is that it forces workers to talk to each other and triggers fruitful and surprising collaborations that wouldn’t have happened with everyone hunkered down inside their own four walls. A recent study that surveyed 40,000 American officer workers, however, found that those in open-plan arrangements were not only less happy with their workspace than those with private offices; those surveyed also judged that the ”benefits of enhanced ‘ease of interaction’ were smaller than the penalties of increased noise level and decreased privacy resulting from open-plan office configuration.” The authors write: “the open-plan proponents’ argument that open-plan improves morale and productivity appears to have no basis in the research literature.” ...

Why is ALDI so much cheaper than other supermarkets?

ALDI stores offer a narrow selection of 1400 high-volume products as opposed to the typical 40,000 or more by supermarket giants. Because they only offer products with high turnover, their overhead is lower. Perishable products like milk, meats and produce arrive 5-7 times per week, so there’s no need to rotate inventory for freshness.

No coupons or credit cards are accepted. Debit cards are accepted.

Customers “rent” a cart by depositing a quarter, and return it at the end of their trip which eliminates the need for ALDI associates to corral them.

- See more at: http://frugalbites.com/why-is-aldi-so-much-cheaper-than-other-supermarkets/#sthash.NwrDNeBG.dpuf

Why is ALDI so much cheaper than other supermarkets? - See more at: http://frugalbites.com/why-is-aldi-so-much-cheaper-than-other-supermarkets/#sthash.NwrDNeBG.dpuf

Why is ALDI so much cheaper than other supermarkets?

ALDI stores offer a narrow selection of 1400 high-volume products as opposed to the typical 40,000 or more by supermarket giants. Because they only offer products with high turnover, their overhead is lower. Perishable products like milk, meats and produce arrive 5-7 times per week, so there’s no need to rotate inventory for freshness.

No coupons or credit cards are accepted. Debit cards are accepted.

Customers “rent” a cart by depositing a quarter, and return it at the end of their trip which eliminates the need for ALDI associates to corral them.

Sep 26, 2013

1. You’re fortunate we gave you a job. Few companies would have the patience and time to invest in you. Don’t make your employees feel like burdens. Encourage them to be better, but don’t condemn them for their shortcomings.

2. You look really good for your age. Beyond the legal issues this brings up of ageism, it’s in very bad taste to give such a backhanded compliment.

3. If you don’t like this job, there are plenty of other candidates standing in line. You’re lucky to be employed. This
is a morale killer. If an employee feels like their job is in peril,
they’ll be far more distracted at work and will likely start looking for
a job elsewhere. ...

... How you think is often more important than that you think, or even
what you think. The characteristic separating the good from the great,
the highly successful from the folks who are just getting along, is
their ability to think about themselves as successful even while on the
journey to greatness -- however "greatness" is defined for you.

An important skill is to think without acting: To plan. What do you
want to be known for? What do you want to do? What is possible? Change
begins with what you tell yourself and others. Change your outlook and
you change what is possible. ...

5. I've linked this before but it needs a reprise: "Why I Think Nonprofits Should Act More Like Businesses"(While is understanding of Puritan history is a bit misguided, his overall take is very good.)